Yet another bombastic rape claim bites the dust

[Togo]

Derec has argued lots of things about college rapes. For an example of his attitude, I refer you to the OP title.

Quite frankly, I'm not much concerned with his attitude. It's abrasive. I get that.

What I am concerned with are his claims.

Well, would you happy with the idea that 'yet another bombastic rape claim bites the dust' is somehow implying that dramatic claims of rape are often or frequently untrue? If not, can you point to any claim that Derec has made on this subject? If not, then why are only concerned with his claims if he doesn't tend to make any? Surely that would be applying a standard to the examination of his posts that doesn't really fit?

 

[laughing dog]

I agree

Derec posts articles, posters flood the thread discussing Derec and not the articles or stories he posts.

Truly a predictable reaction that I see has spanned years and forums with no moderation in sight.. in fact i'm sure a couple will be here shortly to join in.

Indeed. Derec has his hobby horse and rides it often, but he also makes some good points here and there and so many on this forum react with simple Ad Homs. Predictable indeed.

For instance, what good point(s) occur in this particular OP?

 

[Axulus]

Indeed. Derec has his hobby horse and rides it often, but he also makes some good points here and there and so many on this forum react with simple Ad Homs. Predictable indeed.

For instance, what good point(s) occur in this particular OP?

How about this one:

"Now it turns out RS failed to conduct even most basic vetting and that the story is most likely BS.

This is why rape allegations should not be believed automatically."

 

[Togo]

For instance, what good point(s) occur in this particular OP?

How about this one:

"Now it turns out RS failed to conduct even most basic vetting and that the story is most likely BS.

This is why rape allegations should not be believed automatically."

Do people believe rape claims automatically? Is there some kind of substantiation for this point?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How about this one:

"Now it turns out RS failed to conduct even most basic vetting and that the story is most likely BS.

This is why rape allegations should not be believed automatically."

Do people believe rape claims automatically? Is there some kind of substantiation for this point?

We have some on here that categorically defend questionable rape claims.

 

[laughing dog]

How about this one:

"Now it turns out RS failed to conduct even most basic vetting and that the story is most likely BS.

This is why rape allegations should not be believed automatically."

I agree that Rolling Stone exhibited no journalist standards and should not have run the story. However, that does not mean the story is BS. Nor does it follow that rape allegations should not be believed automatically (although I don't believe they should). It should also be the case that rape stories should not be automatically dismissed nor that the alleged victims be automatically smeared.

 

[Derec]

I agree that Rolling Stone exhibited no journalist standards and should not have run the story. However, that does not mean the story is BS.

Given glaring problems with Jackie's account it would be very unlikely if her claim had any merit.

Nor does it follow that rape allegations should not be believed automatically (although I don't believe they should).

How so?

It should also be the case that rape stories should not be automatically dismissed nor that the alleged victims be automatically smeared.

They should be investigated - by the police, not untrained and often biased college officials, but if no merit is found they should be dismissed. Pointing out inconsistencies and problems in the accuser's story is not the same as "smearing". Neither is charging her if probable cause is found that she lied. By the way, why aren't colleges expelling female students for false accusations based on the "preponderance of evidence" standard?

 

[Rhea]

Something to think about before jumping from "rape claim" straight away to "bombastic deliberate hoax"

A letter from a friend: Jackie's story is not a hoax

A letter from a friend: Jackie's story is not a hoax
by Emily Clark | on Dec 07 at 10:43pm
Fellow Wahoos,

My name is Emily, and I was Jackie’s suitemate first year. I am writing to you in regards to Rolling Stone’s recent statement of “misplaced trust” in Jackie. I feel this statement is backwards, as it seems it was Jackie who misplaced her trust in Rolling Stone.

I fully support Jackie, and I believe wholeheartedly that she went through a traumatizing sexual assault. I remember my first semester here, and I remember Jackie’s. Jackie came to UVA bright, happy and bubbly. She was kind, funny, outgoing, friendly, and a pleasant person to be around. That all notably changed by December 2012, and I wasn’t the only one who noticed. Our suite bonded that first semester and talked many times about the new troubles we were facing in college. Jackie never mentioned anything about her assault to us until much later. But I, as well as others, noticed Jackie becoming more and more withdrawn and depressed.

I remember her alarm going off every morning. I always assumed she had gone to class and forgot to turn off her later alarms. Being the lazy freshman I was, I tended to roll over in bed and pay no mind to it, hoping somebody else would turn it off, and remind Jackie about it once she got back from class. If I had known Jackie wasn’t going to class, that she was curled up in bed without the will to turn off the alarm, things would have been much different. I remember second semester, she shared a Netflix account with me and I noticed how much TV she was watching — hours and hours of shows that seemed to get darker and darker as time went on. I wondered how she had time, with homework and school, and I wondered if she was okay. I didn’t ask. I wish I had.

In December 2012, Jackie broke down. All of a sudden she was going home and none of us knew why. It was right before finals, and I couldn’t believe she was leaving. She was distraught, and only said she needed to go home. Her teachers had given her allowance to take her finals over break. At that point, we knew something big had happened. I didn’t know until this year with the publication of Rolling Stone’s article how bad that time was for her.

Sometime that year I remember her letting it slip to me that she had had a terrible experience at a party. I remember her telling me that multiple men had assaulted her at this party. She didn’t say anything more. It seemed that was all she’d allow herself to say. I wish I had done something sooner. I wish I had known how to help. But I applaud Jackie for telling her story, now two years later. It was a story that needed to be told.

However, the articles released in the past few days have been troubling to me, and the responses to them even more so. While I cannot say what happened that night, and I cannot prove the validity of every tiny aspect of her story to you, I can tell you that this story is not a hoax, a lie or a scheme. Something terrible happened to Jackie at the hands of several men who have yet to receive any repercussions.

Whether the details are correct or not, and whether the reporting was faulty, or the hazy memories of a traumatizing night got skewed…the blame should never fall on the victim’s shoulders. Jackie is a victim, as are so many others, men and women, young and old. So many stories have gone untold and so many perpetrators have been allowed to walk free.

There is fear among us, and there is pain after these past few weeks of turmoil. But there is also hope, which has been manifested in a multitude of protests, speeches, and groups formed. There is a support growing among students and faculty that has never been seen before. The number of conversations occurring about rape, rights, consent and justice is astounding and inspiring, but talking only goes so far.

As we approach this much-needed winter break I urge you to continue to support your fellow wahoos; do not let this issue die. Speak up when you see something happening that does not feel right; act when you have a chance to stop something terrible. Talk with your friends, let them know you support them, and that no reputation matters more than their own safety and basic human rights. Let them know you’ll stand by them and that their stories do matter. Walk your friends home, look out for one another, do not turn your back on a fellow student. Discourage those who have caved to peer pressure which encourages them to devalue another human being. Support the efforts of the groups leading change in the wake of this tough semester: One Less, Not on Our Grounds (#HoosGotYourBack), Help Save the Next Girl, and Buddies on Call. Let the nation know we are not a scandal school, but a school that does not tolerate injustice. We are in the public eye right now, and we can either let that cripple us, and shove us back into the mold of a perfect institution, or we can recognize that we have flaws, but that we work to reconcile them.

Sexual assault is not just a UVA issue, but UVA is where this issue has come to the forefront. The University of Virginia is a school historically known for its powerful student body. The Hoos of UVA have always rallied when a change was needed. We still stand as one of the top schools in the nation, and we can be the face of change. Let us be an example, and not a failure. Let us stand with survivors.

Emily Clark

CLAS '16

 

[laughing dog]

How so?

RS did not do its job. What does that have to do with automatically believing a rape story?

They should be investigated - by the police, not untrained and often biased college officials, but if no merit is found they should be dismissed. Pointing out inconsistencies and problems in the accuser's story is not the same as "smearing".

Since no one said it was, one wonders what you are talking about. On the other hand, this OP title is an example of indirectly smearing the victim. And, universities have a duty to investigate violations of their codes of conduct.

Neither is charging her if probable cause is found that she lied. By the way, why aren't colleges expelling female students for false accusations based on the "preponderance of evidence" standard?

You would need to ask the colleges and universities about that. Of course, I suspect they view the term "lie" differently than you tend to use it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A few weeks ago, Rolling Stone published a rather emotional article detailing a gang rape claim at a UVA fraternity.
A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA

Reactions were as predictable as they were misguided: hysteria over "rape-culture" and "patriarchy", the frat in question suspended etc.

Now it turns out RS failed to conduct even most basic vetting and that the story is most likely BS.
Key elements of Rolling Stone’s U-Va. gang rape allegations in doubt

This is why rape allegations should not be believed automatically out of misplaced concern to not "revictimize" the accuser.

Has it been shown that she was lying like the UNC case where the accuser admitted making up the story? Rolling Stone writing a retraction isn't exactly admissible in court to prove a crime allegation "bombastic".

 

[repoman]

I do wonder if this story could have gotten as big as it did if it (allegedly) happened at a frat of a black college. And if not, why not?

I got the idea from scouring a doxxing thread about the case:

http://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-42560-post-898864.html#pid898864

kbell Wrote:
The positive is that these people want a brutal rape that would kill a person to have happen.
These people want a brutal rape by white men

If it's by black men it will be ignored. This is all about taking down white men.

Unfortunately, I think this is more true than not, even if it is subconscious.

 

[Toni]

This is the accuser:



matches up with the rest of the picture from the daily mail.



In this day and age it is completely irresponsible to post a semi-obscured picture of an (alleged) crime victim online. Google image search and similar will still be able to sniff it out.

So, you decided to do the responsible thing and post a clear image?

 

[thebeave]

If you don't want anyone to see her picture, you also have to delete the "Attached Images" box at the end of his post

 

[Derec]

We have some on here that categorically defend questionable rape claims.

And not only here:
HuffPo: Why I Still Believe Rape Survivors by John Foubert who is inexplicably a professor at Oklahoma State.
His position is that if a man denies any rape charges leveled against him he is not a real man. He doesn't even consider the possibility that rape claims might be false.
Another one at WaPo: No matter what Jackie said, we should generally believe rape claims
This article completely dismisses the negative effects on those falsely accused and says that they do not matter, only the accusers do, even if they are lying.
Guardian: Who is Jackie? Rolling Stone's rape story is about a person – and I believe her by Jessica Valenti, the same radical feminist who wants to reverse burden of proof for rape cases.
- - - Updated - - -

\
So, you decided to do the responsible thing and post a clear image?

I do think it is responsible for identity of accusers to be known. Why were the photos removed?

 

[Derec]

Has it been shown that she was lying like the UNC case where the accuser admitted making up the story? Rolling Stone writing a retraction isn't exactly admissible in court to prove a crime allegation "bombastic".

Neither was the original article admissible in court, and I think "bombastic" fit as an adjective for that article. Did you read it?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Has it been shown that she was lying like the UNC case where the accuser admitted making up the story? Rolling Stone writing a retraction isn't exactly admissible in court to prove a crime allegation "bombastic".

Neither was the original article admissible in court, and I think "bombastic" fit as an adjective for that article. Did you read it?

It is "bombastic" if it isn't true.

 

[Derec]

RS did not do its job. What does that have to do with automatically believing a rape story?

RS automatically believed a "rape story" and now have egg of their face.

Since no one said it was, one wonders what you are talking about. On the other hand, this OP title is an example of indirectly smearing the victim.

How is it smearing the "victim"? It is very unlikely that [<snip>]Jackie<snip> is the victim here anyway, and saying that her claims have been discredited is not smearing.

And, universities have a duty to investigate violations of their codes of conduct.

Serious crimes should be deferred to the police for investigation because universities have neither the resources nor expertise to conduct such an investigation. Not to mention the bias inherent in many college administrators who have bought into the whole "rape culture" or "one in four" nonsense. Imagine if somebody like John Foubert is on your college tribunal. You will be found guilty no matter how innocent you are and no matter if your accuser's credibility compares unfavorably to that of Crystal Magnum or Tawana Brawley.

You would need to ask the colleges and universities about that. Of course, I suspect they view the term "lie" differently than you tend to use it.

It was a rhetorical question. I know that they don't because it does not fit the ideological commitment to the "rape culture" narrative. I use the term as "deliberately making false statements" and if a woman is found (using the same standard used to expel men accused of rape) that she lied about a rape claim she should be expelled. Fair? Or is that considered "smearing of rape victims" in your book?

- - - Updated - - -

It is "bombastic" if it isn't true.

And you really think it's true?

 

[thebeave]

I do wonder if this story could have gotten as big as it did if it (allegedly) happened at a frat of a black college. And if not, why not?

I got the idea from scouring a doxxing thread about the case:

http://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-42560-post-898864.html#pid898864

kbell Wrote:
The positive is that these people want a brutal rape that would kill a person to have happen.
These people want a brutal rape by white men

If it's by black men it will be ignored. This is all about taking down white men.

Unfortunately, I think this is more true than not, even if it is subconscious.

Well, there's this one:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/03/-william-paterson-university-gang-rape_n_6257000.html?cps=gravity

Interesting to see how this one pans out.

 

[Derec]

Something to think about before jumping from "rape claim" straight away to "bombastic deliberate hoax"

Emily Clark is not adding much to the discussion since she wasn't there. She doesn't even claim to have seen any of the injuries Jackie alleges to have sustained during this alleged brutal gang rape. She only noticed her becoming depressed and withdrawn, which is not exactly evidence of rape.

While I cannot say what happened that night, and I cannot prove the validity of every tiny aspect of her story to you, I can tell you that this story is not a hoax, a lie or a scheme. Something terrible happened to Jackie at the hands of several men who have yet to receive any repercussions.

If she doesn't know what happened that night how can she know that it wasn't "a hoax, a lie or a scheme"? It's not that she can't "prove the validity of every tiny aspect of her story", it's that she can't prove even the tiniest aspect of her story. Emily's letter has about as much evidentiary power as a buddy of the accused saying "I was not at the party, but I know he didn't rape anybody".
The only thing she accomplished, I guess, is that by identifying herself as Jackie's suitemate she made Jackie's identification much easier.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It is "bombastic" if it isn't true.

And you really think it's true?

Hence your major flaw in most of these cases. You assume it is false (actually, a lie). I have made no assumptions as to the validity of the claim. Therefore, I can not say it is bombastic. You, yourself can't use the term because you also don't know if it is a false accusation.